Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-09 Thread Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce
On 4/7/2017 8:14 AM, Walter Bright wrote: https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6680 Yes, this is for real! Symantec has given their permission to relicense it. Thank you, Symantec! While it's still easy to find, for future reference: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14060846

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-09 Thread Bastiaan Veelo via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Friday, 7 April 2017 at 15:14:40 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6680 Yes, this is for real! Symantec has given their permission to relicense it. Thank you, Symantec! Congratulations, and thank you Symantec :-) Bastiaan.

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-09 Thread Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce
On 4/9/2017 12:05 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote: As a compiler-writer no-nothing, does this have any implications on the various back-ends gaining ideas/code from each other? That is, is it possible we see LDC compile times go down, or DMD optimizations get better? You can't change the

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-09 Thread Steven Schveighoffer via Digitalmars-d-announce
On 4/7/17 11:14 AM, Walter Bright wrote: https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6680 Yes, this is for real! Symantec has given their permission to relicense it. Thank you, Symantec! Awesome news! As a compiler-writer no-nothing, does this have any implications on the various back-ends gaining

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-09 Thread Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce
On 4/8/2017 10:18 PM, jollie wrote: Will this change in licensing pave the way for the conversion of the backend to from c++ to d? That was going to happen anyway, but it makes it more worthwhile.

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-08 Thread Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce
On 4/8/2017 4:24 PM, Jethro wrote: Does this mean that we can now embed the D compiler in to a commercial D app to be used as a scripting like engine(D app compiles D code then dynamically links in code while running)? Yes.

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-08 Thread Jethro via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Friday, 7 April 2017 at 15:14:40 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6680 Yes, this is for real! Symantec has given their permission to relicense it. Thank you, Symantec! Does this mean that we can now embed the D compiler in to a commercial D app to be used as a

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-08 Thread Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce
On 4/8/2017 12:07 PM, Martin Tschierschke wrote: May be we can talk about pr strategy for D in general at Dconf. I expect that how to best take advantage of this development will be a hot topic at DConf.

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-08 Thread Martin Tschierschke via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Friday, 7 April 2017 at 15:14:40 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6680 Yes, this is for real! Symantec has given their permission to relicense it. Thank you, Symantec! Good news! Thank you! I gave a hint of this - additionally mentioning Dconf - to heise.de,

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-08 Thread Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce
On 4/8/2017 10:16 AM, Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: To make sure you have your history correct. GDC wrote the work-alike x86 assembler, and later dual-licensed it to share with LDC. A little while later I dropped it from GDC as it was not really fit for purpose, and rather

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-08 Thread Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d-announce
On 8 April 2017 at 18:48, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > On 4/8/2017 1:36 AM, Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: >> >> On 7 April 2017 at 23:49, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce >>

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-08 Thread Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce
On 4/8/2017 1:33 AM, Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) wrote: AFAIK, Symantec were under no particular obligation here, but none-the-less chose the consumer/developer-friendly route, and I for one couldn't be more appreciative. I'm one who can be very critical of, well, everything, but the fine folks

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-08 Thread Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce
On 4/8/2017 1:36 AM, Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: On 7 April 2017 at 23:49, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: Note that this also resolves the long-standing legal issue with D's inline assembler being backend licensed, and so

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-08 Thread Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce
On 4/8/2017 1:19 AM, Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) wrote: Anyone "in the know" have a any "inside scoop" regarding the such organization's perspective on the "zlib/libpng" license? I tend to favor it for my own OSS projects, since it's (in my perspective) at least as liberal as Boost, but very,

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-08 Thread Jacob Carlborg via Digitalmars-d-announce
On 2017-04-07 17:14, Walter Bright wrote: https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6680 Yes, this is for real! Symantec has given their permission to relicense it. Thank you, Symantec! This is some amazing news!! :) -- /Jacob Carlborg

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-08 Thread Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d-announce
On 7 April 2017 at 23:49, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > Note that this also resolves the long-standing legal issue with D's inline > assembler being backend licensed, and so not portable to gdc/ldc. > That makes the assumption that

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-08 Thread Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) via Digitalmars-d-announce
On 04/07/2017 11:14 AM, Walter Bright wrote: https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6680 Yes, this is for real! Symantec has given their permission to relicense it. Thank you, Symantec! Wow! This is HUGE news for D, and may I say, I think some *major* respect (and "props, j00!") are

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-08 Thread Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) via Digitalmars-d-announce
On 04/07/2017 05:44 PM, Walter Bright wrote: 2. It's on all of the "Accepted OSS Licenses" lists that major corps have because of Boost itself being used in those companies. If your license isn't on the list, your project isn't being used. Yup. We figured every corporation that uses C++ has

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread Kyle via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Friday, 7 April 2017 at 15:14:40 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6680 Yes, this is for real! Symantec has given their permission to relicense it. Thank you, Symantec! Excellent, good work.

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread David Nadlinger via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Friday, 7 April 2017 at 22:57:39 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: Thanks for pointing that out, I didn't know that. I just assumed LDC would have gone with a clang-style inline assembler (does clang even have inline asm?). LDC supports both DMD-style asm {} blocks as well as LLVM's native inline

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce
Now #1 on r/programming subreddit!

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread ketmar via Digitalmars-d-announce
Jack Stouffer wrote: On Friday, 7 April 2017 at 15:14:40 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6680 Yes, this is for real! Symantec has given their permission to relicense it. Thank you, Symantec! Something that just popped into my head: You've said that you've

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce
On 4/7/2017 3:57 PM, Jack Stouffer wrote: You've said that you've avoided ever looking at other compiler's code to avoid legal trouble. Is that problem gone now? No, unless the other compiler is Boost as well.

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Fri, Apr 07, 2017 at 10:38:36PM +0100, rikki cattermole via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > On 07/04/2017 10:03 PM, WhatMeWorry wrote: [...] > > I've been coding in D for years now but was unaware of this issue. > > Could someone give this licensing neophyte an explanation and some > >

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread Jack Stouffer via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Friday, 7 April 2017 at 15:14:40 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6680 Yes, this is for real! Symantec has given their permission to relicense it. Thank you, Symantec! Something that just popped into my head: You've said that you've avoided ever looking at

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce
On 4/7/2017 3:22 PM, David Nadlinger wrote: Just to clarify for people not usually frequenting these circles: LDC does support DMD-style inline assembly, but we use a different implementation. Thanks for pointing that out, I didn't know that. I just assumed LDC would have gone with a

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread Joseph Rushton Wakeling via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Friday, 7 April 2017 at 22:02:31 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: I'll defer to Martin Nowak on what to do about that. It would help for those who need this for specific versions to let Martin know which ones. Great, thanks -- I'll follow up with Martin on slack.

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread Paolo Invernizzi via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Friday, 7 April 2017 at 15:14:40 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6680 Yes, this is for real! Symantec has given their permission to relicense it. Thank you, Symantec! Congrats! That's a big win, and you deserve all the merits! Enjoy the moment! --- Paolo

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread David Nadlinger via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Friday, 7 April 2017 at 21:49:22 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: Note that this also resolves the long-standing legal issue with D's inline assembler being backend licensed, and so not portable to gdc/ldc. Just to clarify for people not usually frequenting these circles: LDC does support

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce
On 4/7/2017 2:54 PM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: My question should have been more specific: will we see the patch changing the license in the source code applied to existing stable release branches? I'd really appreciate it if we could get such a patch applied at least to the current stable

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread ketmar via Digitalmars-d-announce
Walter Bright wrote: Note that this also resolves the long-standing legal issue with D's inline assembler being backend licensed, and so not portable to gdc/ldc. yay!

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread Joseph Rushton Wakeling via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Friday, 7 April 2017 at 15:35:00 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: It applies to all of it! Cool :-) My question should have been more specific: will we see the patch changing the license in the source code applied to existing stable release branches? I'd really appreciate it if we could get

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce
On 4/7/2017 1:28 PM, Ulrich Küttler wrote: With all those forks of dmd now well underway, can I please reserve the name 'dork'? ;) HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAH! (Hey, I'm feeling pretty good today!)

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce
On 4/7/2017 12:02 PM, Radu wrote: Also, big up for the whole community as there is a big positive vibe around the news and nobody is complaining about basic stuff missing line website, docs, infrastructure etc. Yes, it's the most positive response to us I've ever seen on HN, by far.

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce
Note that this also resolves the long-standing legal issue with D's inline assembler being backend licensed, and so not portable to gdc/ldc.

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce
On 4/7/2017 2:04 PM, Jesse Phillips wrote: MIT almost equal though. I suspect that the reason MIT came up with their own license is so they could call it the "MIT License". Branding, ya know.

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce
On 4/7/2017 1:02 PM, Jack Stouffer wrote: AFAIK the reasons it was chosen were 1. It's as close to public domain as you can get in international law Yes. 2. It's on all of the "Accepted OSS Licenses" lists that major corps have because of Boost itself being used in those companies. If your

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread rikki cattermole via Digitalmars-d-announce
On 07/04/2017 4:14 PM, Walter Bright wrote: https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6680 Yes, this is for real! Symantec has given their permission to relicense it. Thank you, Symantec! Hip hip hooray! I'm gonna go get some cake in a cup!

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread rikki cattermole via Digitalmars-d-announce
On 07/04/2017 10:03 PM, WhatMeWorry wrote: On Friday, 7 April 2017 at 15:14:40 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6680 Yes, this is for real! Symantec has given their permission to relicense it. Thank you, Symantec! I've been coding in D for years now but was unaware

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread Johannes Pfau via Digitalmars-d-announce
Am Fri, 7 Apr 2017 08:14:40 -0700 schrieb Walter Bright : > https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6680 > > Yes, this is for real! Symantec has given their permission to > relicense it. Thank you, Symantec! Great news! Maybe someone could notify http://phoronix.com .

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread Jesse Phillips via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Friday, 7 April 2017 at 19:37:14 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: On Friday, April 07, 2017 08:14:40 Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6680 Yes, this is for real! Symantec has given their permission to relicense it. Thank you, Symantec! Well,

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread WhatMeWorry via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Friday, 7 April 2017 at 15:14:40 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6680 Yes, this is for real! Symantec has given their permission to relicense it. Thank you, Symantec! I've been coding in D for years now but was unaware of this issue. Could someone give this

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread Ulrich Küttler via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Friday, 7 April 2017 at 15:14:40 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6680 Yes, this is for real! Symantec has given their permission to relicense it. Thank you, Symantec! This is brilliant! Fantastic! With all those forks of dmd now well underway, can I please

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Friday, April 07, 2017 20:02:52 Jack Stouffer via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > On Friday, 7 April 2017 at 19:37:14 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: > > From what I've seen, the fact that we use it so heavily in the > > D community is abnormal > > AFAIK the reasons it was chosen were > > 1. It's

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread bluecat via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Friday, 7 April 2017 at 15:14:40 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6680 Yes, this is for real! Symantec has given their permission to relicense it. Thank you, Symantec! Very good news and a solid accomplishment for being on top of Hacker News (as of writing

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread Jack Stouffer via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Friday, 7 April 2017 at 19:37:14 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: From what I've seen, the fact that we use it so heavily in the D community is abnormal AFAIK the reasons it was chosen were 1. It's as close to public domain as you can get in international law 2. It's on all of the "Accepted

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Friday, April 07, 2017 08:14:40 Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6680 > > Yes, this is for real! Symantec has given their permission to relicense > it. Thank you, Symantec! Well, this is certainly great news. Does this make dmd the only

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread Sameer Pradhan via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Friday, 7 April 2017 at 15:14:40 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6680 Yes, this is for real! Symantec has given their permission to relicense it. Thank you, Symantec! That is really good news! One less shackle preventing users from adopting :D (and if I am not

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread Radu via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Friday, 7 April 2017 at 15:14:40 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6680 Yes, this is for real! Symantec has given their permission to relicense it. Thank you, Symantec! Glorious day for D and Dlangers. Congrats Walter for the tenacity and thanks Symantec for

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Fri, Apr 07, 2017 at 08:14:40AM -0700, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6680 > > Yes, this is for real! Symantec has given their permission to > relicense it. Thank you, Symantec! Hooray!! Finally!!! Never thought I'd see this day,

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread David Oftedal via Digitalmars-d-announce
Wow, congratulations, and a big thank you to those who made it happen.

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Fri, 2017-04-07 at 18:51 +0100, Russel Winder wrote: > […] > So now the campaign begins to get DMD formally packaged by Debian and > Fedora. > > Having DMD packaged as well as LDC and GDC will be a great thing for > marketing of D. We also need GDC in Fedora. -- Russel.

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Fri, 2017-04-07 at 08:14 -0700, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote: > https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6680 > > Yes, this is for real! Symantec has given their permission to > relicense it.  > Thank you, Symantec! So now the campaign begins to get DMD formally packaged by Debian

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce
On 4/7/2017 9:10 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: On 04/07/2017 12:01 PM, Jack Stouffer wrote: Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/6419py/the_official_d_compiler_is_now_free_as_in_freedom/ Thanks, someone also put it on hackernews - found it by browsing for "new" threads. --

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread Joakim via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Friday, 7 April 2017 at 15:14:40 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6680 Yes, this is for real! Symantec has given their permission to relicense it. Thank you, Symantec! That was nice of Symantec to finally grant your request. Will this mean more work put into

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread deadalnix via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Friday, 7 April 2017 at 15:14:40 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6680 Yes, this is for real! Symantec has given their permission to relicense it. Thank you, Symantec! <3

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread Jon Degenhardt via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Friday, 7 April 2017 at 15:14:40 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6680 Yes, this is for real! Symantec has given their permission to relicense it. Thank you, Symantec! Congrats, this is a great result!

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread bachmeier via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Friday, 7 April 2017 at 15:14:40 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6680 Yes, this is for real! Symantec has given their permission to relicense it. Thank you, Symantec! Great news! By 2027, we should no longer hear objections to D based on the backend license.

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread Basile B. via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Friday, 7 April 2017 at 15:14:40 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6680 Yes, this is for real! Symantec has given their permission to relicense it. Thank you, Symantec! Good news. Question: Does this apply from now or can the previous DMD releases also be

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread ketmar via Digitalmars-d-announce
Walter Bright wrote: https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6680 Yes, this is for real! Symantec has given their permission to relicense it. Thank you, Symantec! i don't even know what to say... thank you! i didn't even hoped that this will happen. what a glorious day today.

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d-announce
On 04/07/2017 12:01 PM, Jack Stouffer wrote: On Friday, 7 April 2017 at 15:14:40 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6680 Yes, this is for real! Symantec has given their permission to relicense it. Thank you, Symantec! Reddit:

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread Jack Stouffer via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Friday, 7 April 2017 at 15:14:40 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6680 Yes, this is for real! Symantec has given their permission to relicense it. Thank you, Symantec! Reddit:

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce
On 4/7/2017 8:25 AM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: Question: will this 'fix' be backported to existing stable releases? Or will it just apply going forward? I ask because it could make a difference to what is legally possible to package for e.g. Linux distros, etc. It applies to all of it!

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread Joseph Rushton Wakeling via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Friday, 7 April 2017 at 15:14:40 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6680 Yes, this is for real! Symantec has given their permission to relicense it. Thank you, Symantec! Question: will this 'fix' be backported to existing stable releases? Or will it just apply

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread Jack Stouffer via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Friday, 7 April 2017 at 15:14:40 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6680 Yes, this is for real! Symantec has given their permission to relicense it. Thank you, Symantec! A great step forward for the language! A huge thank you to everyone who made this happen.

Re: dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread Joseph Rushton Wakeling via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Friday, 7 April 2017 at 15:14:40 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6680 Yes, this is for real! Symantec has given their permission to relicense it. Thank you, Symantec! Congratulations Walter! This is marvellous news :-)

dmd Backend converted to Boost License

2017-04-07 Thread Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce
https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6680 Yes, this is for real! Symantec has given their permission to relicense it. Thank you, Symantec!